1,700 plaints on domestic disputes pending in Chandigarh police stations: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, January 1

In Chandigarh, no less than 1,700 complaints regarding domestic disputes are pending in the police stations. The observation by the Punjab and Haryana High Court to this effect came while taking up an appeal filed by a father against a lower court’s order. The Bench was hearing a matrimonial dispute case, in which the appellant-father was granted visitation rights to meet his minor daughter every third working Friday.

The observation came less than three months after the Bench of Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Ashok Kumar Verma directed Additional Solicitor-General of India Satya Pal Jain and amicus curiae Divya Sharma to assist the court “as to how amendments recommended vide Law Commission report of 2015 are to be carried out”.

As the case came up for resumed hearing, the Bench observed that the Law Commission report of 2015 was of the view that child support should continue even after attaining the age of 18 and the period may extend till the child turned 25. The Bench added that as per the commission’s report, a child had the birthright to meet his parents and the grandparents and many disputes could be resolved through mediation.

Appearing before the Bench, Jain informed the court that the Union Ministry of Law and Justice, vide letter dated December 14, 2021, had informed him that the recommendations for amendment in the Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890, and various sections of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, fell under the concurrent list as per the Constitution of India.

Jain submitted that the department, as such, had sought views of all the state governments and the Union Territory administrations across the country in the matter. The study would take some time, Jain told the court.

Taking a note of his submissions, the Bench asserted: “Appreciating that the first step has already been taken by the Ministry of Law and Justice for getting views from other states/UT Administrations, this matter is being adjourned….” The case will now come up for further hearing before the Bench in the third week of April.